Perioperative goal directed therapy: evidence and compliance are two sides of the same coin

Assessment of fluid unresponsiveness guided by lung ultrasound in abdominal surgery: a prospective cohort study

A fluid challenge can generate an infraclinical interstitial syndrome that may be detected by the appearance of B-lines by lung ultrasound. Our objective was to evaluate the appearance of B-lines as a diagnostic marker of preload unresponsiveness and postoperative complications in the operating theater. We conducted a prospective, bicentric, observational study. Adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery were included. Stroke volume (SV) was determined before and after a fluid challenge with 250 mL crystalloids (Delta-SV) using esophageal Doppler monitoring. Responders were defined by an increase of Delta-SV > 10% after fluid challenge. B-lines were collected at four bilateral predefined zones (right and left anterior and lateral). Delta-B-line was defined as the number of newly appearing B-lines after a fluid challenge. Postoperative pulmonary complications were prospectively recorded according to European guidelines. In total, 197 patients were analyzed. After a first fluid challenge, 67% of patients were responders and 33% were non-responders. Delta-B-line was significantly higher in non-responders than responders [4 (2–7) vs 1 (0–3), p < 0.0001]. Delta-B-line was able to diagnose fluid non-responders with an area under the curve of 0.74 (95% CI 0.67–0.80, p < 0.0001). The best threshold was two B-lines with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 57%. The final Delta-B-line could predict postoperative pulmonary complications with an area under the curve of 0.74 (95% CI 0.67–0.80, p = 0.0004). Delta-B-line of two or more detected in four lung ultrasound zones can be considered to be a marker of preload unresponsiveness after a fluid challenge in abdominal surgery.

The objectives and procedures of the study were registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03502460; Principal investigator: Stéphane BAR, date of registration: April 18, 2018).

Hydroxyethyl starch for perioperative goal-directed fluid therapy in 2020: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Perioperative fluid management - including the type, dose, and timing of administration -directly affects patient outcome after major surgery. The objective of fluid administration is to optimize intravascular fluid status to maintain adequate tissue perfusion. There is continuing controversy around the perioperative use of crystalloid versus colloid fluids. Unfortunately, the importance of fluid volume, which significantly influences the benefit-to-risk ratio of each chosen solution, has often been overlooked in this debate.

MAIN TEXT

The volume of fluid administered during the perioperative period can influence the incidence and severity of postoperative complications. Regrettably, there is still huge variability in fluid administration practices, both intra-and inter-individual, among clinicians. Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT), aimed at optimizing flow-related variables, has been demonstrated to have some clinical benefit and has been recommended by multiple professional societies. However, this approach has failed to achieve widespread adoption. A closed-loop fluid administration system designed to assist anesthesia providers in consistently applying GDFT strategies has recently been developed and tested. Such an approach may change the crystalloid versus colloid debate. Because colloid solutions have a more profound effect on intravascular volume and longer plasma persistence, their use in this more "controlled" context could be associated with a lower fluid balance, and potentially improved patient outcome. Additionally, most studies that have assessed the impact of a GDFT strategy on the outcome of high-risk surgical patients have used hydroxyethyl starch (HES) solutions in their protocols. Some of these studies have demonstrated beneficial effects, while none of them has reported severe complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The type and volume of fluid used for perioperative management need to be individualized according to the patient's hemodynamic status and clinical condition. The amount of fluid given should be guided by well-defined physiologic targets. Compliance with a predefined hemodynamic protocol may be optimized by using a computerized system. The type of fluid should also be individualized, as should any drug therapy, with careful consideration of timing and dose. It is our perspective that HES solutions remain a valid option for fluid therapy in the perioperative context because of their effects on blood volume and their reasonable benefit/risk profile.

Nurses' Indications for Administration of Perioperative Intravenous Fluid Therapy-A Prospective, Descriptive, Single-Center Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To examine whether nurse anesthetists and postanesthesia nurses' administration of intravenous (IV) fluid therapy during surgery and in the postanesthesia care unit is based on evidence. Secondarily to investigate if providing indications for IV fluid administration changed nursing practice.

DESIGN

Prospective, descriptive, single-center study in Scandinavia comparing two cohorts.

METHODS

Descriptive, fluid volume, and type data were obtained in both cohorts. Cohort 1 (n = 126) was used as baseline data. In cohort 2 (n = 130), nurses recorded indications for type and volume of fluid therapy using a validated list. Analysis compared median volumes of crystalloid or colloid fluids of surgical types by cohort. Analysis compared frequency of given indication reasons for each IV fluid by surgical type.

FINDINGS

Basic static variables were chosen most frequently for indications of IV fluid needed for all surgeries except high-risk abdominal surgery where dynamic variables were more frequent. Signs and symptoms of inadequate tissue perfusion were only sparsely indicated. The volume of intraoperative crystalloid fluids was statistically different for patients with hip fracture surgery in cohort 2. Volumes of both colloid and crystalloid fluids were significantly higher for high-risk abdominal surgery in cohort 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse anesthetists and nurses in the postanesthesia care unit rely more on basic static parameters than signs of inadequate tissue perfusion when they make decisions about fluid administration. The indications cited for fluid administered to high-risk abdominal surgery and hip fracture patients did not always fit guidelines. This indicates the need of a stronger intervention to change practice to follow evidence-based clinical guidelines.

Practical impact of a decision support for goal-directed fluid therapy on protocol adherence: a clinical implementation study in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of using a real time clinical decision-support system, "Assisted Fluid Management" (AFM), to guide goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) during major abdominal surgery. We compared a group of patients managed using the AFM system with a historical cohort of patients (control group) who had been managed using a manual GDFT strategy. Adherence to the protocol was defined as the relative intraoperative time spent with a stroke volume variation (SVV) < 13%. We hypothesised that patients in the AFM group would have more time during surgery with a SVV < 13% compared to the control group. All patients had a radial arterial line connected to a pulse contour analysis monitor and received a 2 ml/kg/h maintenance crystalloid infusion. Additional 250 ml crystalloid boluses were administered whenever measured SVV ≥ 13% in the control group, and when the software suggested a fluid bolus in the AFM group. We compared 46 AFM-guided patients to 38 controls. Patients in the AFM group spent significantly more time during surgery with a SVV < 13% compared to the control group (median 92% [82, 96] vs. 76% [54, 86]; P < 0.0005), and received less fluid overall (1775 ml [1225, 2425] vs. 2350 ml [1825, 3250]; P = 0.010). The incidence of postoperative complications was comparable in the two groups. Implementation of a decision support system for GDFT guidance resulted in a significantly longer period during surgery with a SVV < 13% with a reduced total amount of fluid administered. Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov (NCT03141411).

Crystalloid versus Colloid for Intraoperative Goal-directed Fluid Therapy Using a Closed-loop System: A Randomized, Double-blinded, Controlled Trial in Major Abdominal Surgery

BACKGROUND

The type of fluid and volume regimen given intraoperatively both can impact patient outcome after major surgery. This two-arm, parallel, randomized controlled, double-blind, bi-center superiority study tested the hypothesis that when using closed-loop assisted goal-directed fluid therapy, balanced colloids are associated with fewer postoperative complications compared to balanced crystalloids in patients having major elective abdominal surgery.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty patients were enrolled in the protocol. All patients had maintenance-balanced crystalloid administration of 3 ml · kg · h. A closed-loop system delivered additional 100-ml fluid boluses (patients were randomized to receive either a balanced-crystalloid or colloid solution) according to a predefined goal-directed strategy, using a stroke volume and stroke volume variation monitor. All patients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the Post-Operative Morbidity Survey score, a nine-domain scale, at day 2 postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included all postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Patients randomized in the colloid group had a lower Post-Operative Morbidity Survey score (median [interquartile range] of 2 [1 to 3] vs. 3 [1 to 4], difference -1 [95% CI, -1 to 0]; P < 0.001) and a lower incidence of postoperative complications. Total volume of fluid administered intraoperatively and net fluid balance were significantly lower in the colloid group.

CONCLUSIONS

Under our study conditions, a colloid-based goal-directed fluid therapy was associated with fewer postoperative complications than a crystalloid one. This beneficial effect may be related to a lower intraoperative fluid balance when a balanced colloid was used. However, given the study design, the mechanism for the difference cannot be determined with certainty.

Goal directed hemodynamic therapy based in esophageal Doppler flow parameters: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have compared perioperative esophageal doppler monitoring (EDM) guided intravascular volume replacement strategies with conventional clinical volume replacement in surgical patients. The use of the EDM within hemodynamic algorithms is called 'goal directed hemodynamic therapy' (GDHT).

METHODS

Meta-analysis of the effects of EDM guided GDHT in adult non-cardiac surgery on postoperative complications and mortality using PRISMA methodology. A systematic search was performed in Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (last update, March 2015).

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in which perioperative GDHT was compared to other fluid management.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

Overall complications.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Mortality; number of patients with complications; cardiac, renal and infectious complications; incidence of ileus. Studies were subjected to quantifiable analysis, pre-defined subgroup analysis (stratified by surgery, type of comparator and risk); pre-defined sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA).

RESULTS

Fifty six RCTs were initially identified, 15 fulfilling the inclusion criteria, including 1,368 patients. A significant reduction was observed in overall complications associated with GDHT compared to other fluid therapy (RR=0.75; 95%CI: 0.63-0.89; P=0.0009) in colorectal, urological and high-risk surgery compared to conventional fluid therapy. No differences were found in secondary outcomes, neither in other subgroups. The impact on preventing the development of complications in patients using EDM is high, causing a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 50% for a number needed to treat (NNT)=6.

CONCLUSIONS

GDHT guided by EDM decreases postoperative complications, especially in patients undergoing colorectal surgery and high-risk surgery. However, no differences versus restrictive fluid therapy and in intermediate-risk patients were found.